Quote from: danbuter;773115Since I'm usually the GM, any game that says I can't roll dice is immediately dropped from consideration for the table. I like rolling dice.

Completely agree. Its the one thing stopping me from running Numenera.

In addition to assuming that NPC vs NPC/Object is uninteresting or won't need to be rolled, player always rolls seems to assume that PvP rolls either won't occur or aren't interesting.

Quote from: Starglyte;773240Completely agree. Its the one thing stopping me from running Numenera.

I wouldn't like that either (as Player or GM),  but can't you just ignore it... have the GM roll for NPCs and forces opposing the Players?

Quote from: Starglyte;773240Completely agree. Its the one thing stopping me from running Numenera.

Note that, generally speaking, flipping the facing of a mechanic is generally the easiest thing in the world.

For example, making D&D completely player-facing is ridiculously trivial (players roll defense, NPCs have static attack scores, etc.).

Similarly, flipping the facing of Numenera's mechanics would be trivial. Just pick whatever aspect you want faced towards the active character and go from there.

Quote from: Bren;773241In addition to assuming that NPC vs NPC/Object is uninteresting or won't need to be rolled, player always rolls seems to assume that PvP rolls either won't occur or aren't interesting.

These are definitely the drawbacks of these systems.

Quote from: Raven;773175I still have my copy of this as well as the Marvel one they came out with later. Never got to play either one.

I ran a 3 year long PBEM with Marvel and its some of my FTF groups favorite or second favorite game. I'd strongly encourage you to try it.

I'd offer to run it online sometime but I only do that via chat programs--IRC, SKYPE, etc, rather than PBP/PBEM

It works very well online for the record.

FWIW I like rolling dice too. But its not essential for me to enjoy roleplaying in general, so I don't think its absence would stop from playing a game I wanted to run.

Quote from: Simlasa;773244I wouldn't like that either (as Player or GM),  but can't you just ignore it... have the GM roll for NPCs and forces opposing the Players?

Most RPGs can be shifted from GM dice rolling to GM not dice rolling, and vice versa without difficulty. Icons and Numenera are both examples, but any RPG with a symmetrical opposed dice rolling system with simple enough math can also be transitioned.

For example, in Exalted 1e, we just set all NPC rolls to difficulty based on a 2:1 ratio dice rolled. This provided a marked improvement on the game as it freed up the GM considerably

Quote from: Bren;773241In addition to assuming that NPC vs NPC/Object is uninteresting or won't need to be rolled, player always rolls seems to assume that PvP rolls either won't occur or aren't interesting.

I don't find that this is true.

For example, for me Cinematic Unisystem (in the Buffy the Vampire Slayer RPG) was the first place I encountered the concept. That basically works by giving NPCs variant stats where an average roll is already added in. For this, PC vs. PC works fine as written, and is designed for that.

Resolving extended NPC vs. NPC conflicts blow-by-blow would be a problem - but there's a good reason for that. It recommends that the GM shouldn't resolve NPC vs. NPC fights blow by blow, but should instead just estimate and come up with a result rather than going to blow-by-blow mechanics.

I also haven't had any issues with PC-vs-PC conflicts in Apocalypse World and variants. Each player gets a turn to initiate a round of fighting, and the other fights back during that.

Quote from: Ladybird;773238I don't really give a shit who rolls the dice.

If the players are rolling more dice, well, fine, they can feel a touch more in control of their destiny. It's all good. I still control interpreting the results. I still control the world.

Say that one wanted to let Players make defence rolls instead of the GM making monster attack rolls... How would that work? How would the monsters attack bonus and the PCs armour class factor in?

In 3e?

Instead of d20 + attack vs. AC, d20 + armor bonus vs. attack+11.

Quote from: Will;773319In 3e?

Instead of d20 + attack vs. AC, d20 + armor bonus vs. attack+11.

Ah. Right. That's simple enough.

Could this be used in 5e?

Quote from: Necrozius;773320Ah. Right. That's simple enough.

Could this be used in 5e?

The base dice system is the same (d20+mod), so yes.

You would need to consider Advantage and Disadvantage though as rerolls are not so easy to reverse. Though I imagine you could just apply the opposite effect to the rolling side i.e. an NPC with Advantage would just be Disadvantage to the PC.

Quote from: jhkim;773304I don't find that this is true.

I guess you mean just the PvP part, because what you said about how Cinematic Unisystem handles NPC vs. NPC supports that the system considers NPC only action to be not very interesting or to not need a roll.

QuoteI also haven't had any issues with PC-vs-PC conflicts in Apocalypse World and variants. Each player gets a turn to initiate a round of fighting, and the other fights back during that.

So are they rolling attacks every other round or are they both rolling attacks in each round?

I may be misinterpreting what you intended, but in the latter case it would seem to make PvP combat resolve in fewer rounds than PvNPC.

While in the former case, each player would act only in alternate rounds.

Quote from: Bren;773329So are they rolling attacks every other round or are they both rolling attacks in each round?

There are no rounds in Apocalypse World games.

The rolls aren't directly opposed, but both players roll when they narrate what the PC is doing, just as you do against an NPC.

You also have to remember that there is a counter attack built into every attack in Apocalypse World games. So, you attack a PC, roll the dice and the target PC may be able to strike you back as a result of that roll.